Paranoid character and the intolerance of indifference.

This paper suggests that aspects of paranoid character are structured around fantasies of magical and concrete connectedness to objects; these fantasies serve to avoid the terrors of object inconstancy. The authors describe how these fantasies are expressed in the psychoanalytic situation and explore their relation to common paranoid phenomena. The paranoid person must maintain these fantasies of connectedness at all cost or risk experiencing unbearable indifference between self and object. Paradoxically, the sacrifice of self and object boundaries inherent in these fantasies makes object constancy even more difficult to achieve because of the secondary defensive use of anger mobilized to protect the boundaries of the self.     

Psychoanalytic lexicography: notes from two "harmless drudges"

The co-Editors in Chief of the American Psychoanalytic Association's new edition of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts (previously edited by Moore and Fine and last revised in 1990) recount their lexicographical adventures. Editing a dictionary at the turn of the twenty-first century is a daunting, some might say foolhardy, undertaking. The most obvious challenge faced by the editors was the growing pluralism within psychoanalysis. However, a more fundamental challenge was that the object of psychoanalytic study, the mind and its processes, can be known only by putting words to our observations, inferences, and interpretations. Psychoanalytic thinkers, starting with Freud, have wrestled with this challenge in ways that define the history of psychoanalysis itself. Long gone are the days when Freud could commend the "correctness" of Sterba's lexicographical efforts. Today postmodern critics, at the opposite extreme, argue that terms and concepts are best understood as "verbal gestures" in the "language-game" of psychoanalysis. Some go so far as to assert that dictionary-writing is obsolete. The co-Editors in Chief of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts have not succumbed to such nihilistic views, but have instead struggled to establish a reasonable stance within contemporary debates over the nature of psychoanalytic language.     

The impact of politeness and relationship on perceived quality of advice about a problem

Advice is a common but potentially problematic way to respond to someone who is distressed. Politeness theory (Brown & Levinson, 1987) suggests advice threatens a hearer's face and predicts that the speaker‐hearer relationship and the use of politeness strategies can mitigate face threat and enhance the effectiveness of advice messages. Students (N=384) read 1 of 16 hypothetical situations that varied in speaker power and closeness of the speaker‐hearer relationship. Students then read 1 of 48 advice messages representing different politeness strategies and rated the message for regard shown for face and for effectiveness. However, neither speaker‐hearer relationship nor politeness strategies was consistently associated with perceived threat to face or perceived advice effectiveness. We suggest revisions to politeness theory and additional factors that may affect judgments of face sensitivity and advice effectiveness.     

交多少朋友合适?谈亚里士多德对"大量交友"的评论

引言 结交多少个朋友合适?提出这样的问题似乎是钻牛角尖,也不属于哲学家的兴趣.然而,古代的哲学家并未忽视这个问题的重要性,他们都直接或间接地关注过"友谊".实际上,提出交多少朋友合适的问题,就是提出友谊的限度问题,更确切地说,是提出了与他人特殊关系的延展问题.我们看到,这种关系并不要求排他性,但将其无限扩展则难免使其变质.     

A reassessment of psychoanalytic education: Controversies and changes2

To understand the many controversies surrounding psychoanalytic education, it is necessary first to understand the unique role played by education in our field where control of educational structures remains the most important measure of professional success for the majority of psychoanalysts. To keep debate about educational policy focused on the task of strengthening the intellectual basis of psychoanalysis, it is also necessary to understand that forces affecting education arise from at least three different domains which can too easily become confused with one another: 1) the domain of knowledge‐ intellectual, scientific and clinical; 2) the domain of the organized professional community; and 3) the domain of local institutional politics. The authors explore controversy arising within and among each of these domains. They also explore the major alternatives proposed to the Eitingon model of psychoanalytic education, arguing that excessive authoritarianism in education arises not from the existence of hierarchical structures per se (as suggested by the ‘French model’), but from two other factors: the condensation of all important professional functions into the single ‘monolithic’ position of the training analyst, and the lack of agreed upon methodology for determining the validity of theoretical propositions. The solution lies not in obliterating all gaps in expertise and status by doing away with hierarchical structures altogether, but rather in strengthening the intellectual, scholarly and research context within which psychoanalytic education takes place. We must attempt to relocate our experience of a gap where it belongs: not between those who are training analysts and those who are not, but between what we feel we already know about mental life and what we do not yet know.     

Whose personality is better,mine or my partner's? Self‐enhancement bias in relationships

Previous research has documented self‐enhancement and relationship partner‐enhancement motivations, but not examined whether individuals view themselves or their partners more favorably, overall. The authors conducted three studies that revealed a general tendency to favor oneself over one's partner in direct self–partner personality comparisons. This illustrated a motivational precedence of self‐enhancement over partner‐enhancement goals. In Study 1, participants rated self‐only traits more favorably than partner‐only traits. In Studies 2 and 3, participants rated desirable traits as more characteristic of themselves than their partner, particularly when traits were more relevant to personal than relationship success. The authors also found that this self‐favoring bias was weaker (typically nonexistent) among those with higher relationship satisfaction, lower self‐esteem, or lower self‐deceptive tendencies. The authors discuss practical, theoretical, and methodological implications.     

Psychoanalysis and homosexuality: do we need a new theory?

No need exists, it is argued, for a new psychoanalytic theory of homosexuality. Certainly psychoanalysis should not be expected to generate such a theory using its own methodology alone. The preoccupation with producing such a theory avoids more important questions about psychoanalytic theory building raised by an examination of the long relationship between psychoanalysis and homosexuality. These questions concern the problems related to using psychoanalytic methodology (1) to construct categories (including the categories normal and abnormal), (2) to construct causal theory (the problems include the limitations of psychoanalytic developmental theory and a long-standing confusion between psychoanalytic developmental theory, psychoanalytic genetic reconstruction, and psychodynamics), and (3) to identify "bedrock." Finally, the question is addressed of what might be needed that is new in the psychoanalytic approach to homosexuality.